Trump’s Bold Message to Cities: ‘Drop Dead’ – What It Means for Urban America | CNN Business

In October 1975, President Gerald Ford made waves when he told New York City that the federal government wouldn’t come to its rescue during a financial crisis. This moment was famously summarized by the New York Daily News with the headline, “Ford to City: Drop Dead.”

Fast forward to today, and the dynamics have shifted in a troubling way. President Donald Trump is addressing urban issues with policies that many see as punitive. While Ford eventually offered federal loans to New York City, Trump has cut funding and sent federal troops to various cities, amplifying tensions.

Cities often feel powerless to counteract these federal actions. In 2022, metropolitan areas accounted for nearly 91% of the nation’s economic output, yet they have limited power over their budgets or legal decisions. That’s a paradox considering these urban centers are essential to the nation’s economy and support rural communities too.

Professor Richard Schragger from the University of Virginia notes that we’re seeing an unusual peak in anti-urban sentiment. “Trump is affirmatively attacking and occupying American cities,” he states, pointing out the stark difference in approach from Ford’s era.

Local leaders, constrained by state laws, find themselves trapped. For instance, if a Republican governor like Bill Lee of Tennessee pushes for federal troops in Memphis, the city’s Democratic mayor, Paul Young, can do little to resist. Providence’s Mayor Brett Smiley describes the situation: “We don’t have all the legal tools to resist these federal actions.”

This legal framework dates back to the 1870s, with the enactment of Dillon’s Rule that grants states control over cities. Most states adopted this rule, limiting the autonomy of cities to shape their policies. Only a few states, like California or New York, practice a principle called home rule, allowing cities to govern themselves more freely.

Moreover, recent legislation in conservative states has tightened control over urban policies. For instance, the “Death Star” law in Texas prevents cities from enacting progressive local legislation on issues like immigration and climate change.

Cities are often blamed for national problems like poverty and crime, despite lacking control over federal funding or national policies. A recent study indicated that about one-third of a city’s revenue comes from federal grants, compounding their financial vulnerabilities.

Richard Briffault, a law professor at Columbia University, paints a bleak picture: “Cities have responsibilities but not power.” This lack of authority means local governments bear the financial burden while lacking the resources to find solutions, leading to a myriad of challenges.

Looking ahead, Smiley emphasizes the importance of collaboration with the federal government to tackle pressing issues like housing and public safety. But the unpredictability of the current administration complicates these efforts. “Things are being done to cities, not in partnership,” he adds, reflecting a growing discontent among urban leaders.

As cities navigate these challenges, their struggle between policy mandates and economic needs will shape the future of urban governance in America.

For further insights on urban economic contributions and federal relations, check out reports from the U.S. Conference of Mayors here.

Source link